HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-04-25 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
PALO ALTOCITYCOUNCILMEETINGS AFIE BROAUCASTUVEVIA4(4'.SU FREQUENCY90.1 ON FM DIAL
Regular Meeting
April 25, 1988
ITEM
Oral Communications
Approval of Minutes of March 28, 1988
1. Resolution Expressing Appreciation to Tony
Lydgate
PAGE
59-454
59-454
59-454
2. Resolution Expressing Appreciation to Mary 59-455
Jean Place
3. Agreement with Santa Clara Central Fire 59-455
Protection District re Hazardous Materials
Response Vehicle Mutual Aid Plan
4. Finance and Public Works Committee Recom- 59-455
mendation re Fuel Cell Program Agreements
Agenda Changes/ Additions, and Deletions 59-456
6. PUBLIC HEARING: Transitional Zone Regu.a-- 59-456
tioj�s - Planning Commission Recommendation
to Amend the OR, C tai, CC, CS, GM, and LM
Zone Districts (Continued from 4/18/88)
7. PUBLIC HEARING: Application of a Land-
scape ` Combining District (L) Overlay to
the Stanford Medical Center Entryway
Median Strip, 200 Pasteur Drive (Continued
from 4/18/88)
8. Citizen Complaint Process - Police Depart-
ment (Contijued from 4/18/98)
59-457
59-458
ITEM
PAGE
9. Appeal of Victor Zacher of the Decision of 59-460
the Architectural Review Board and the
Director of Planning and Community Develop-
ment to Approve the Design of a Nine -Unit
Townhouse Project at 1235 and 1245-1247
Alma Street
10. Finance and Public Works Committee Recom-
mendation re Municipal Service Center
Building C Remodel (CIP 86-06)
53-460
11. Resolution Expressing the City's Intention 59-464
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54220
to Purchase Property Located at the Corner
of Page Mill Road and Ash Street from the
County of Santa Clara Transportation
Agency
12. Contract with Ferma Corporation for Demoli-
tion Services at Several City Sites
13. Civic Center Improvements - Recommended
Long- and Short -Term Improvements
Recess
13A. (Old 5) Finance and Public Works Committee
Recommendation re Proposed Utility late
Adjustments
13B. (Old 10) Finance and Public Works Commit-
tee Recommendation re Municipal Service
Center - Building C Remodel (CIP 86-06)
Adjournment to a Closed Session at 10:40 p.m.
Final Adjournment at 10:57 p.m.
59-465
59-466
59-477
59-477
59-478
59 479
59-479
Regular Meeting
Monday, April 25, 1988
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date
in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, at 7:39 p.m.
PRESENT: Bechtel (arrived at 7:42 p.m.) , Cobb,
Fletcher, Klein, Levy, Patitucci,
Renzel, Sutorius, Woolley
Mayor Sutorius announced that a Special Dinner Meeting with
County Supervisor Dianne McKenna was held prior to the
meeting in the Council Conference Room. Also, the Council
would adjourn during or after the meeting to a Closed
Session re Reber, et_al v. the Cit of Palo Alto and the
Golden Gate Council of the American Youth Hoste].s1 Inc._
G.C. 4956. a .
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
1. Ed Power, 2254 Dartmouth Street, spoke about dredging
spoils and the current activity in the Palo Alto Yacht
Harbor.
2. Thelma Carr, 2421 Greer Road, said she had a problem
with cars parking in front of her house.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
NOTIO t Council Member Woolley moved, seconded by
Fletcher, approval of the Ninutae of March 28, 1988, as
submitted.
MOTION PASSED by a vote of 8-0-1, Renzel "abstaining."
1. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO TONY LYDGATE
MOTION: Council Member Levy moved, seconded by
Klein,
approval of the Resolution.
UTION 66entitled Riggsmunom OF TOE COUNCIL
PALO ALT' EXPRESSING ITS APPRECIA-
TION TO TONT LYDGATE POR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC SERVICE
AS A MEMBER OF THE VISUAL ARTS JURY*
Mayor Sutorius read the resolution.
NOTION !PASSED unanimously, Patitucci absent.
59-454
4/25/88
Council Member Levy, Council Liaison to the Visual Arts Jury
(VAJ), did not believe there was any commission, committee,
or board in the City where the members were more conscien-
tious, active, put in more time, and utilized less of a
budget to greater accomplishment than the VAJ.
Mr. Lydgate was grateful for the opportunities and resources
the City of Palo Alto offered and was proud to have contri-
buted his share. He looked forward to the opportunity to
serve again.
2. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO MARY JEAN PLACE
(701-0
NOTION: Council Meatier Levy moved, seconded by Klein,
approval of the Resolution.
RESOLUTION 6687 entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING ITS APPRECIA-
TION TO MARY JEAN PLACE FOR OUTSTANDING PUBLIC
SERVICE AS A MEMBER OF THE VISUAL ARTS JURY"
Mayor Sutorius read the Resolution.
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Patitucci absent.
Ms. Place thanked the Council for the opportunity of serving
on the VAJ and said she Was not leaving her commitment to
see the community continued to develop in an aesthetic and
artistic way.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Sutorius removed Item 5.
MOTION: Mayor Sutorius moved, seconded by .Klein, approval
of the Consent Calendar.
3. AGREEMENT WITH SANTA CLARA COUNTY CENTRAL FIRE PROTEC-
TION DISTRICT RE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS RESPONSE VEHICLE
MUTUAL AID PLAN (CMR:153:8) (1440-01)
4 FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS TO THE
CITY COUNCIL RE FUEL C LL FR RAM AGREEMENTS THAT
COUNCIL DIRECT STA F TO ISCONTINUE NEWT ATIONS FOR
FURTHER CONSULTANT SERVICES AND ALSO aUTHORJZE CON-
T1i UATI CF; I"HE°t ; ITE_, SFLECTE IOW !PROCESS (11O 1
MOTION PASSED unanimously, Rensel absent.
AGENDA CHANGES( ADDITIONS/ AND DELETIONS
City Manager Bill Zaner said Item 5 would become Item 13A.
6. PUBLICHEARING:. TRANSITIONAL ZONE REGULATIONS -- PLAN-
NING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND THE OR/ CN, CC,
CS, GMl AND LM ZONE DISTRICTS (Continued from 4/18/88)
(CMR:258:8) (701-03/237-01)
Planning Commissioner Patricia Cullen said the item was the
result of the joint Architectural Review Board (ARB) and
Planning Commission subcommittee. It went through the
Planning Commission on two hearings, there was input from
the public, and there was consideration after that. The
Planning Commission believed the item as recommended to
Council would provide additional protection for adjacent
residential districts within 150 feet of the industrial or
commercial zones with the impacts. various items such as
access, lighting, etc., which had: sometimes been found
offensive in residential zones.
Council Member Bechtel referenced page 2 of the memo of
March 25, 1988, from Chief Planning Official Carol Jansen on
transitional zoning, and she said there was nothing in the
ordinance that defined when the regulations would go into
effect and when they would not. She asked what was "minor,"
and what was "major" in that regard.
Director of Planning and Community Environment Ken Schreiber
said the basic rule stated in the staff report (CMR:258:8)
was that conditions of approval, items attached to a
particular development application, needed some relevance to
the nature of that application. Staff's concern was the
potential for some members of the public to feel a minor
application would be the vehicle for their proposing major
site modifications, especially driveways, parking lots,
loading docks, etc. -There was no clear definition of
minor" and "major; rather it was the nexus between the
application and the proposed conditions.
Council Member Bechtel said that was an understanding staff
had, but she asked how a future staff would. know and be able
to interpret the item in order to ensure it was not
expanded. She would be concerned about_ extremely minor
remodeling and then suddenly they had to move their drive-
way.
Mr. Schreiber said staff dealt with the issue on a weekly
basis as part of the normal administration of the ordinance
and in the ARB process. The record was clear in both the
59-456
4/25/88
staff report and in discussions of the item that the
requirements and guidelines were not intended_ to be arbi-
trarily imposed on applications where they did not have
relevance. The City Attorney's office worked with staff on
cases where there might be a: question as to• whether an
appropriate nexus existed_ between potential condition and
the item in front of the City.
Council Member Bechtel asked whether that should be spelled
out in the ordinance itself.
City Attorney Diane N;:thway said if Council was concerned
about it. it would not be difficult to spell. it out in the
ordinance. -
MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by
Fletcher, to adopt the Planning Cormission recommendation to.
adopt., ordinance adding Chapter 18.64, Additional Site
Development and Design Regulations for Commercial and
Industrial Districts, to the Zoning Ordinance.
ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled _ "ORDINANCE, OF
THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO ADDING CHAPTER
18.64 REGARDING ADDITIONAL SITE DEVELOPMENT AND
DESIGN REGULATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICTS TO TITLE 18 (ZONING) OF THE PALO ALTO
MUNICIPAL CODE AND AMENDING OTHER SECTIONS OF TITLE
18 TO REFER TO THIS ADDITIONAL CHAPTER"
Mayor Sutorius declared the Public Hearing open. Receiving
no requests from the public to speak, Mayor Sutorius
declared the Public Hearing closed.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Bechtel moved that staff return
at second reading with clarification of definitions of minor
modifications as opposed to major, and when the _quidelines
would go into effect.
AMENDMENT DIED FOR LACE OF A SECOND
MOTION PASSED unanimously.
7. PUBLIC HEARING: APPLICATION OF A LANDSCAPE COMBINING
DISTRICT L OVERLAY TO THE STANFORD MEDICAL CENTER
ENTRYWAY MEDIAN STRIP 200 PASTEUR DRIVE (Continued from
4/18/88) (CMR:237:8) (701-03/300)
Council Member Patitucci did not participate due to a. con-
flict of interest.
Mayor Sutorius declared the Public Hearing open. Receiving
no requests from the public to speak, Mayor Sutorius
declared the Public Hearing closed.
59-457
41/25/88
MOTION: Council Member Bechtel moved, seconded by Klein,
to adopt. staff recommendation approving a .zone change to add
a Landscape Combining District (L) overlay to the Public
Facilities (PF) zoned Stanford University Medical Center
entryway median strip.
ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING entitled "ORDINANCE OF
THE COUN IL OF THE £ITY OF PALO ALTO MENDING
SECTION 18.08.040 OF THE PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE
(TaE ZONING HAP) TO APPLY THE LANDSCAPE COMBINING
DISTRICT (L) REGULATIONS TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 200
PASTEUR DRIVE'
MOTION. PASSED unanimously, Patitucci ."not partici-
pating."
8. CITIZEN COMPLAINT PROCESS - POLICE DEPARTMENT (Continued
from 4/18/88) (CMR:243:8) (1202)
City Manager Bill Zaner said a series of documents was
included in Council's packet (on file in the..City Clerk's
office) to bring Council up to date on the policy now pur-
sued by the City --and which they had pursued for some
time --with regard to citizen complaints in the Police
Department. The City took complaints in all departments
regarding City affairs, but those in the Police Department
were handled more formally and differently. Council would
note there was a General Order for all police officers, and
a memorandum from the City Attorney indicated the City's
present position with regard to releasing information on the
complaint process. The City was awaiting some .indication
from the State Attorney General as to whether he concurred
with the City Attorney's position.
City Attorney Diane Northway specified what. the process
would be for the Attorney General to render an opinion and
when the City could anticipate something in writing. She
had a communication from Clayton Roach in the Attorney
General's office, who had been assigned to write the opin-
ion, and he indicated that his tentative opinion would be
written around May 13, 1988; therefore, she anticipated
receiving a written decision two or three weeks after that
date. When the Attorney General's office wrote an opinion
on issues of the nature, it was customary for them to
Oolicit opinions from cities or other governmental officials
around the state who might have some information, or might
like to provide a point of view on a particular issue. That
had been done in the subjectcase, and she communicated with
the Attorney General with respect to her opinion, indicated
there were cities that had a differing opinion, and sug-
gested he contact those cities.
59-458
4/25/88
Ben Bailey, 171 Everett Street, wanted to know what the
Police Department was doing with complaints. He already
knew that in 1985, 99 percent of complaints did not result
in disciplinary action. In 1986, the figu.e was 97 percent.
At present the Police Department was 'keeping citizen com-
plaints under a blanket of total secrecy. He accused the
Police Department of long-term, wholesale whitewash and said
the evidence was in the complaint files. He asked to see
the evidence. He understood from the District Attorney's
office that it was against the law' for the District
Attorney's office to investigate the Police. Department and
it must be done by internal. affairs. To allow a Police
Department to judge complaints against a Police Department
was conflict of interest. He wanted to see an Office of
Citizen Complaints in Palo Alto headed by neutral people;
citizen complaint data posted daily in a public place in
Palo Alto as it was in San Francisco, outside Room 565 in
the Hall of Justice; and a little Glasnost
Mayor Sutorius clarified staff suspended the information
provided for an extended period of time with statistical
data by category of activity based on the rulings provided
and which were being followed -up on. He asked what had been
observed on staff's visit to San Francisco to the address
referred to by Mr. Bailey.
Mr. Zaner said there was a posting derived from records. As
the City Attorney indicated, them: were varying opinions as
to what materials might be extracted and disclosed. The
information was not specific. It was statistical data that
came from those records.
Mayor Sutorius appreciated the responsiveness on the part of
Assemblyman Sher in assisting in the inquiry.
Council Member Levy commented that Council's hands were tied
until they heard from the Attorney General's office. He
would prefer to see the release of statistical data that did
not interfer with the privacy rights of individuals but gave
the. citizens of Palo Alto and overall view of the kind of
complaints received and how the City responded to them. The
gross kind of data presented by Mr. Bailey was misleading
because there were many ways that managers of the department
had in discussing performance with subordinates. As discus-
sed in the memoranda, Palo Alto seemed to have a policy of
encouraging complaints even of.a minor nature.. No one liked
to be stopped by the police, and he understood why .Many,
complaints were made and -also why strict disciplinary action
per se did not accompany many of the complaints. There were
ways of dealing with police officers which could lead to
improvement of performance but could not be categorized as 'a
59-459._
4/25/88
disciplinary action. He hoped to work with the Attorney
General's opinion to resume giving citizens overall data of
police performance. From his observations, he was satisfied
the police were well trained and dealt with the public in a
professional and courteous manner.
NO ACTION TAKEN
9. APPEAL OF VICTOR ZACHER OF THE DECISION OF THE ARCHI-
TECTURAL REVIEW BOARD (ARE) AND THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO APPROVE TIE DESIGN OF A
NINE -UNIT TOWNHOUSE PROJECT AT 1235 AND 1245-1247 ALMA
STREET (CMR:257:8) (300)
Mayor Sutorius said a letter (on file in the City Clerk's
office) asked tor a continuance of the hearing to the next
regularly -scheduled Council meeting. The material was not
.igned, and he asked if staff had received it personally and
directly from Victor Zacher.
Planner James Gilliland confirmed that staff received the
request directly from the appellant.
MOTION TO CONTINUE: Vice Mayor Klein moved, seconded by
Ren,.tiel, to continue the item to the May 2, 1988, City
Council meeting.
Vice Mayor Klein clarified his motion to continue was not
based on Mr. Zacher's statement in his letter that he did
not receive adequate notice but was made as a matter of
courtesy. Based on the usual procedures, he believed Mr.
Zacher did receive adequate and sufficient notice.
Council Member Patitucci asked if adequate notice was given
according to the City's regular procedures.
Mr. Schreiber said yes.
Council Member Patitucci asked if the delay would cause
hardship to the other, party.
Mr. Schreiber did notbelieve so.
mOTIO" PASSED unanimously.
10. FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION RE
MUNICIPAL SERVICE CENTER - BUILDING C REMODEL (CIP
86-(A), THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE BID PROCESS
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT (CMR ; 224:8 )
59-460
4/25/88
As corrected
5/23/88
Council Member Patitucci said the project raised a number of
issues that needed to be considered, especially at a time
when they were faced with a major budget -cutting exercise.
He believed the cost identified on page 2 of the staff
report (CMR:224:8) at $74 a square foot was inaccurate and
was closer to $127 a square foot when all the costs were
included, not just the construction cost. That was a high
cost for remodeling. The project scope had changed since
award of the agreement because of such items as asbestos
removal, increased remodeling, etc. He felt the project
started out with a limited budget and objective and got out
of hand. Another concern was it was a CIP project wherein
the operating costs of $38,000 were added, and he believed
the costs should all come out of the capital budget and they
should not be using operating funds. For some reason, they
looked at Utility dollars as different from a General Fund
appropriation, but in his view every dollar was a public
dollar.
MOTION TO REFER: Council Member Patitucci moved, seconded
by Cobb, to refer the item to the F&PW Committee in conjunc-
tion with the upcoming budget process.
Mayor Sutorius clarified a CIP program for a previous year
would be reintroduced into the 88-89 budget year process.
Council Member Patitucci said the additional appropriation,
whether a new CIP or a fold -in of the old, should be put up
against the other projects examined in the CIP review and
budget approval processes.
Council Memlaer Cobb said he changed his position due to
things that had happened with respect to the budget since
the F&PW Committee, and now found himself in agreement with
Council Member Patitucci on a number of things.
City Manager Bill Zaner urged Council to adopt the ordi-
nance amending the budget. The item was Utility Funds and
not considered second-class money nor unimportant, but staff.
did consider the Utility operation as very important.
Unless they provided the kind of facilities necessary for
the field forces in order to maintain water, gas, sewer, and
electric, those utilities would suffer in the long run.
Most of the field forces for utilities were housed in the
subject building and it required remodeling. Staff had
moved a - portion of .the operation into a new building. The
funds could not be used in the General Fund for other pur-
poses.
59.461
4/25/88
Council Member Fletcher understood the previously -received
lower bid was because it was bid off-season. The advantage
would be lost if the project was delayed, and staff expected
the subsequent bid to be higher. She asked if the portable
buildings were already there.
Senior Engineer Jim Harrington said the portable
were pending approval of the recommendation.
Council Member. Fletcher believed the delay might
advantage.
buildings
be a dis-
Vice Mayer Klein agreed with Council Member Fletcher. The
statement that Council regarded Utility monies differently
was a "smokescreen" argument that was not really there.
They were important dollars, but the issue was whether the
expenditure was wise. In regard to -budgetary diffi-
culties, they all knew the issue was in the General Fund,
and action of the subject item would not impact the General
Fund except very indirectly. Council should focus on
whether it was a wise expenditure of City monies in further-
ance of their responsibility as .stewards of the .:Utility
system. Council Member Fletcher had accurately pointed out
what would happen if they did not approve the recommenda-
tions. It was not a few months delay because they would
have to wait another year if they wanted to take advantage
of the spring bidding system. The cost of such delay was
not merely the inflationary factor but also the inefficien-
cies that would continue in the operation of the Utility
system for a year, and he did not believe that was war-
ranted. He opposed the motion and hoped they would go
forward with the project.
Council Member Bechtel concurred with the comments made by
Council Member Fletcher and Vice Mayor Klein. The original
bid approximately a year ago was $540,000. The present bid
of $378,000 was considerably below that and was below the
engineer's estimate of $450.000. She did not believe the
timing was right to delay.
Council Member Levy was generally persuaded by the arguments
made by the last three speakers, but he was concerned with a
point raised by Council Member Patitucci in regard to the
cost per square foot of $127. The figure seemed high, and
he asked staff if the figure was; appropriate and comparable
to work done by the private sector.
Mr. Harrington said staff had reviewed the numbers very par-
ticularly • and found that, including the item for design,
they still arrived at the same number of $74 per square
foot. Further, staff wanted to compare the rate with items
59-462
4/25/88
done recently and also with the industry standard. In two
instances --the main library built in 1981, and the Terman
Library build in 1984 --there was a range of cost between $66
and $82 per square foot in today's costs. Another informal
estimate was arrived at from a consultant familiar with
rates in the industry whose number was approximately $79 per
square foot. The costs were within the norm allowing for
similar kinds of construction.
Council Member Levy asked for comment on Council Member
Patitucci's concern that the $74 per square foot only spoke
to the construction contract and did not comment on design
fees and other elements which raised the total cost to
$650,000.
Mr. Harrington indicated the raw costs would come in at
about $66 per square foot, the design costs added another
$7, and testing raised the cost another 70$; still arriving
at the previously -noted number of $74 a square fooC.
Council Member Woolley underscored Council Member
Patitucci's comment that they tended to treat Utilities dif-
ferently. To some extent, she believed it probably was the
source of the dollars spent on Utilities being different but
it also had to do with the technical nature of Utilities.
Council tended to rely on staff recommendations and not to
give matters the same kind of scrutiny as the General Fund
departments. That might not be the correct way to deal with
Utility budgets, and they should keep in mind in the budget
session.
Council Member Patitucci said his strongest argument was
that the scope of work changed. If his calculation of
square feet and staff's was correct, they had added 40 per-
cent to the project in mid -year without putting it against
other CIP alternatives even within the Utility Department.
He did not believe that was appropriate out of the budget
cycle. He did not consider the funds productive when they
were just going into office space. It was appropriate to
remodel from time to time, but he had the feeling the proj-
ect had changed.
Mayor Sutorius said the questions and dialogue at the F&PW
Committee meeting were most helpful, and he was pleased to
see the reevaluations of the allocations because it was
important that the proper reserve treatment occur with
respect to each of the Utilities involved in funding the
project.
NOTION 70 REFER FAILED by a vote of 3-6, Cobb, Patitucci,
Reasel,.voting 'aye.*
59-463
4/25/88
Mayor Sutorius referenced the F&PW minutes for the subject
and noted that no recommended action had occurred. In order
for staff to review the matter, Mayor Sutorius said the item
would be continued to follow Item 13A.
11. RESOLUTION entitled "RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING ITS INTENTION PURSUANT TO
COLE SECTION 54220.. TO PURCHASE PROPERTY
GOVERNMENT
LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF PAGE MILL ROAD AND ASH STREET
FROM THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA TRANSPORTATION AGENCY
(CMR:252:8) (701-04/1510-01)
Council Member Cobb asked if the in -lieu funds entirely
covered the purchase.
Manager, Real Property, William Feliman said yes; the proj-
ect had no budget impact as far as the budget issues going
before Council.
Council Member Bechtel asked how much money was in the in -
lieu fund.
Mr. Fellman replied approximately $2 million.
MOTION: Council Member Fletcher roved, seconded by
Patitucci, to adopt the staff recommendation to:
1) Adopt the resolution expressing the City's interest in
purchasing the identified County -owned Page Mill Road
and Ash Street site; and
2) Direct staff to negotiate the specific provisions of the
purchase with the Santa Clara County Transportation
Agency.
RESOLUTION 6688 entitled °RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING ITS INTENTION
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54220 TO PUR-
CHASE PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF PAGE MILL
ROAD AND ASH STREET FROM THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
TRANSPORTATION AGENCY.
Council Member Patitucci was a little concerned by the price
but believed the location was excellent for the type of
housing the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) built. It
was a good ,idea to put the in -lieu money to work, and
Council should take advantage of the good opportunity.
John Mock, 736 Barron Avenue, urged _ approval of the staff
recommendation and concurred with the PAHC's letter (on file
in the City Clerk's office). The property was crucial to
the., area's development and the PAHC or the City would bethe
beet holder of the land to ensure its availability as rental
59-464
4/25/88
As corrected
5/23/88
housing as opposed to condominiums. It would also provide
an excellent opportunity to ensure compatibility with the
surrounding neighborhood and to ._provide transition from an
overly large development.
MOTION PASSED unanimously.
12. CONTRACT WITH FERMA CORPORATION FOR DEMOLITION SERVICES
AT SEVERAL CITY SITES (CMR:246:8) (701-03/810)
Mayor Sutorius said the staff report (CMR:246:8) indicated
the demolition contract for the Arastradero Preserve would
include four water tanks, and he asked if there was some use
for the tanks until after the fire season.
Senior Engineer Jim Harrington said the .timing was not
uygent. Staff initiated the add-on because it could be
packaged with a much bigger project to get an overall lower
rate for all the projects. The maintenance issues should be
taken care of in the not -too -distant future, but there was
no particular reason to pull down the water tanks. The Fire
Department concurred.
Mayor Sutorius asked if there was water there.
Mr. Harrington said yes. The swimming pool in the hostel
site could be utilized for fire protection if needed.
Mayor Sutorius asked if a completion date was associated
with the contract, so if staff judged it appropriate to
leave the tanks there through the fire season it could be
done‘
Mr. Harrington clarified the administrative process would be
to award, anJ then the engineer would issue a change order
to delete that item. If it was desired to remove the tanks
later, staff would return at a later time with a separate
contract. He .emphasized the bidding climate was extremely.
favorable.
Council Member Levy asked how much was being saved by taking
the items together.
Mr. Harrington replied they could save 100 percent on the
present costs because of the bidding environment. It could
possibly cost $20,000 instead of $10,000 for the Arastradero
Preserve add --on.
Council Member Levy asked if the
was staff's best guess.
Mr. Harrington said it was a good indicat=ion..
59--465
4/25/88
Council Member Woolley was concerned i t was not the time to
be dealing with the Arastra property. She appreciated
Council did direct staff to demolish the ranger house when
they found they could not use it as a place for a ranger to
live, but in the light of events that occurred since that
vote, she did not believe they should take the step now.
Mayor Sutorius raised a good point about the possible use of
the water, and she was also concerned that they did not
really know what they would be doing with the property. The
ranger house was in good condition and she did not see why
they should demolish it. A decision should be made about
the total package. If they ended up demolishing other
structures, it would again be a package deal and might save
something in terms of the total volume of demolition work.
MOTION: Council Member Woolley moved, seconded by
Bechtel, to adopt the staff recommendation (CMR:246:8) as
modified: Delete Recommendation #1; change .Recommendation
#2 to "Authorize the Mayor to execute the demolition con-
tract with Perna Corporation in the amount of $25,775 for
base bid; and change Recommendation #3 to •Authorize staff
to execute change orders to the demolition contract of up to
$4,000.1
MOTICO PASSED unanimously
13. CIVIC CENTER IMPROVEMENTS RECOMMENDED LONG- AND
SHORT-TERM IMPROVEMENTS '1CMR:147:8) (810--01-01)
Council Member Levy referenced _trying to improve utilization
by developing a food service with tables, chairs, etc., on
the plaza and asked staff to expand on that idea and whether.
the $20,000 request would be sufficient for that.
City Manager Bill Zener said in the .plan discussed for the
lesser amount and also for the larger amount of money, staff
antieipated being able to use the plaza for lunch dining,
i.e.1 tables and chairs in the plaza area for people to
bring. their own lunches or have carry -out lunches from
restaurants nearby. Staff- also anticipated a number of
vendorsin the community would be interested in going to the
plaza and space would be made available for them. In brief,
staff would: not formalize the :food servicebut would provide
a fairly large number of tablesand chairs and arrange for
the to be properly stored, cleanedup, etc.
Council Member Levy asked if those services would come in
under ; the amounts of money spoken : to.
Mr. Zaner clarified the capital_ costs would. Paying someone
to do the clean up in the plaza, and to place and remove
tables and chairs would be an ongoing operational costs.
Staff did not believe it would be expensive and would entail
59-466
4/25/88
As corrected
5/23/88
hourly, part-time work, The cost might be in the area of
$4,000 a year.
Mayor Sutorius introduced members of the Urban Design
Committee (UDC): Betty Meltzer, Ken Allman, Rosy Rapp, Jane
Goldstein, and Joe Huber.
Betty Meltzer said the UDC was asking Council to consider
the redesign of public space from an underused and unappre-
ciated area into one which could bemagnetic, important, and
enjoyed. The plaza was convenient and relevant space for
all pedestrians and workers in the region.
Ken Alsman presented a slide show of ideas for the Council
to consider. Many communities enjoyed a stronger sense of
public space, and the UDC would like to see a stronger civic
image.reinforced in the Civic Center plaza. It was impor-
tant to establish a building on an axis, and one of the
visions they looked at was to link the underutilized alley
all the way through to University. Avenue. The UDC believed
there should be a clear sense of the entrance to the build-
ing. Unfortunately, the primary place of entry was under-
ground, and some improvement to Level A might be good for
the 90 percent of the people who used that as the entrance
into City Hall. He asked Council to imagine what the
entrance to City Hall might look like if it was surrounded
by flags and banners to provide a sense of color, life, and
celebration The plaza should be inviting to the public.
The plaza entry could have something introduced by color,
flowers, and planting. Another area was the former fountain
which should become a mound of planting to create, the kind -
of inviting area to bring people into the plaza,; area.
Underneath the magnolia trees was a natural place for tables
and chairs, and he believed it was essential to have ven-
dors. Other aspects were decomposed granite, movable
benches, grass, sculptures which might attract children, and
signage for the building.
Betty Meltzer said the redesign should only be done '-in' a way
which would ensure use by the public and a visually pleasing
plaza. The UDC believed the plan they submittedmet both
conditions.
Mayor Sutorius observed .the service of the UDC and presenta-
tion was interesting and helpful.
Vice Mayor Klein said the budget restraints led him to
believe that r hatever they would do now would be . 'it* for an
unpredictable number of years. Thus, he was concerned about
the language that appeared both . in the UDC's and staff's
59-467
4/25/88
recommendation that it was only a short-term programs If
nothing else was going to be done for ten years, he asked if
the plan would still be the UDC's recommendation or if they
would like to reconsider and make a *permanent" recommenda-
tion for about the same dollars.
Mr. Alsman imagined the UDC. would want to take another look
at the recommendations from a long-term standpoint to see
whether elements should be added. As they looked at it, the
UDC felt that $50,000 for what they were asking for was a
great deal of money, and they hoped the actual implementa-
tion would cost less.
Council Member Bechtel asked if all the turf would be
removed.
Director of Public Works David Adams said no, only small
portions as shown in the sketch attached to the UDC report
(on file in the City Clerk's office).
Council Member Woolley asked if the Council decided they
only had $20,000, whether the UDC would prefer to put the
project on hold until they could find the $50,000, or to do
what they could with $20,000.
Ms. Meltzer said rather than spend $20,000 for a mediocre
job, the UDC would rather wait and do it right.
Council Member Cobb asked if it was fair to say the view
just expressed was a consensus of the UDC.
Mayor Sutorius noted for the record there was a nodding of
heads.
Council Member Fletcher asked if decoration o.f the elevator
towers was discussed.
Mr. Alsman said the suggestion was not to call attention to
them or use them as canvases, but to paint them out in some
respect. The (JDC did discuss using them for art but, given
the budget, did not feel it would add to the project.
Counci?. Member Fletcher clarified the idea was to paint the
towers to hide them.
M. Alsman said yes, something needed to be done to the
color. Those elements should fade away and not be treated
as primary structures within the plaza.
Council Member Fletcher said she had seen heavy tables made
of cement that were not portable. Since the downtown was
59-46►8
4/25/88
busy all the time, including evenings and weekends when
staff would not be around to take chairs and tables in and
out, she asked if making a permanent installation was sug-
gested.
Mr.. Ai scan said the UDC spent a lot of time on that subject,
and there were several viewpoints. One was for the heavier
tables which were available all the time, and another was
that they were more expensive and not flexible. They were
not as inviting to people who might want to move tables
around to join up with friends. Personally, he believed the
tables could be left out most of the time and they probably
would stay there.
Council Member Fletcher asked staff if the idea was to have
the tables and chairs out while City Hall was open or on
holidays and weekends, too.
Mr. Adams said the present intent was to take the tables and
chairs out and bring them back in at the end of the day.
Mr. Zaner clarified "end of the day" might mean the end of
the busy period when people would make use of them, or it
might be later in the day. He doubted they would be heavily
used much after the lunch period. He urged the Council not
to get involved in the design or logistics of the plaza.
The issue that remained before Council was one of a policy
priority as to whether it wanted to allocate funds now and
how much. If not, what instructions it wished to give the
Committee.
Council Member Levy said a lot a plazas were shown as ones
that Palo Alto should emulate, and yet there were few people
in them. Others had a lot of people, and he .got the impres-
sion that a critical difference was the availability of
kiosks selling things. He asked the UDC to comment on the
importance of vendors, etc.
Mr. Alsman said anything they could do to activate the
plaza was important, to give people a reason for being
there.
Council Member Levy asked if there were enough benches,
chairs, etc., in the design to attract people to the plaza
to eat. He got the impression there was not, and it would
be better to have more a feeling of ,chaos.
Mr. Alsaan said the UDC approached the design as a begin-
ning. Having too many tables and chairs made the plaza
arrays look empty. The kind of things suggested could be
added to easiy A set of tables and chairs might cost $400
or less.
59-469
4/25/88
Council Member Patitucci asked _ what it would cost to take
the whole fountain out, and whether that had been con-
sidered.
Mr. Allman said unfortunately nothing that happened in the
plaza that dealt with the structural elements was easy.
Mr. Adams said i.t would only cost about $2,000 to physically
remove the visible structure, but other elements might be
involved. Replacement was not included in that cost.
Mr. Zaner said staff had plans to move the piece of artwork
to a City park.
Council Member Patitucci said the idea of flowers was defi-
nitely preferable, but the idea of removing the fountain
altogether might be more preferable. He believed it was
difficult to enter City Hall and asked about an awning so
people knew there were doors there.
Ms. Meltzer said the flags would be one way of focusing on
the entry area. A covered awning was a possibility. There
were many possibilities for the' entry area. The Committee
was trying to keep within the budget.
Council Member Woolley did not see banners in the budget.
Mr. Alsman believed they were listed as "pots and poles."
NOTION: Council Member Woolley moved, seconded by Renzel,
to adopt staff recommendation (CPR;247z8) as modified:
Adopt Recommendation #1, "A delay in construction of the
Civic Center Plaza improvements beyond 1988"; change Recom-
mendation #2 to "Adopt the short-term p toposal of the Urban
Design Committee (UDC), page 3 of Committee Report dated
April 21, 1988, and determine the source of funding during
the CIP budget discussions*: and adopt Recommendation #3 as
is "Expenditures of up to $80,250 for consultant services
for Roberts Associates.'
Council Member Woolley believed they were all concerned
about the budget deficit and, since they were close to
budget discussions, it was inappropriate for the Council to
decide that evening where the funding would come from. It
was $50,000 well spent, and they would want to make a trade-
off. She thoroughly agreed with the UDC, especially in
light of what Vice ;Mayor Klein's statement that it might be
a relatively long-term solution, that they had better do it
right. Even if they had to wait a year, she would rather
see them. spend $50,000 than spend $20.000 and do the project
right now.
59-470
4/25/88
Vice Mayor Klein asked what the present policy was regarding
having vendors on the plaza.
Assistant Planning Official George Zimmerman said about two
years ago Council approved guidelines in the form of regula-
tions regulating minimum distances between vendors and mini-
mum clearance in sidewalk areas, and making certain provi-
sions for Lytton Plaza. Staff and the Police Department
administer vendors and generally advised vendors where they
should locate. Obviously, staff could be directed to ,place
new vendors who applied for licenses in the area of_. the
Civic Center plaza, or suggest to currently- licensed ven-
dors they might wish to shift locations on a temporary basis
to test the Civic Center plaza.
Vice Mayor Klein clarified staff did nothing to encourage
any vendors in the Civic Center plaza and, indeed, actively
discouraged them at the present time.
Mr. Zimmerman said yes.
Vice Mayor Klein asked if there was an action plan to
encourage vendors.
Mr. Zaner replied staff did not have a plan at the moment,
but he did not believe there would be a problem in finding
people who would want to provide the service.
Vice Mayor Klein believed their horizon was not broad
enough, and he suggested not limiting themselves to the
sidewalk vendors. Restaurateurs and other merchants might
be interested in setting up a booth on the plaza. With some
imagination and creativity, they might have a rotating group
of restaurateurs. The project might involve the Chamber of
Commerce or other groups of merchants. He supported the
motion in major part but had two concerns. One was'he would
add a direction to the UDC to reconsider the project along
the lines of its beingthe final project for a significant
time; and second, he had many concerns about the amount to
be paid to Roberts Ae ociates. He asked if the $80,250 came
from the $63,000 originally approved, plus the additional
$17,000.
Mr. Adams said that was correct.
MAIER AND SECOND OF MOTION AGED TO . ADD RECOMMENDATION
#4, . TO "REQUEST THE UDC RECONSIDER THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS TO
THE _ CITY COUNCIL tM LIGHT OF THEIR PROPOSAL BEING A FINAL
SOLUTIOM RATHER THAN a SHORT-TERM SOLUTION"
59-471
4/25/88
Vice Mayor Lein was very concerned the last $17,000 of the
time expended by' Roberts Associates was not approved by the
Council and waa not well spent. Before he could support it,
he would like either a further investigation of the item or
some persuasive arguments in support of the expenditure.
Mr. Adams assured Council the work was performed in good
faith by the consultants with the encouragement of staff.
The reason for the encouragement was to try to meet the
deadlines staff believed they were under to get the perma-
nent plaza project underway. Staff felt the consultant
should be compensated for the work.
Vice Mayor Klein had read the report but was not persuaded.
He had no doubt the consultant put in the time, but it
seemed the City was not advised properly that some of the
things they discussed were not structurally possible.
Mr. Adams said they were structurally possible with condi-
tions and modifications, i.e., the shallow pool that was
designed versus a more desirable deep pool. Those matters
took a great deal of time to explore.
Vice Mayor Klein asked if it was a fair statement that the
City was not properly advised as to the cost of the struc-
tural changes that would be necessary to do some of the
things.
Mr. Adams said that was a fair statement, but the sequence
of knowledge was not understood. Some of the information
was not available to the consultants until they developed a
portion of their design concept and then had to determine
how that related to the structural limitations. The
requirement to return to the ARB on numerous occasions also
contributed. If Council wished, staff could go through a
list of the services performed by the consultants.
Vice Mayor Klein believed it would be helpful to have some-
one not involved with the project look at the $17,000.
Mr. Zaner. saw no problem with that.
AMENDMENT: , Vice Mayor Klein awed, seconded by Patitucci,
to direct the City Auditor to examine the scope of the pur-
pose and appropriateness of the additional services that
were performed and advise whether the additional sus of
$170250 should be paid and delay pay eft of the $17,250
untilthe Council has reviewed the report.
59--472.
4/25/88
As corrected
5/23/88
Council Member Patitucci strongly agreed with Vice Mayor
Klein's amendment. He hoped what was examined was not the
legitimacy of the work or the charges but how the City
entered into a situation where it authorized expenditures
beyond what the Council approved, who authorized them, and
what were the circumstances of .the authority to authorize
them. A consultant was an innocent party in a situation
where somebody from the City said to continue the work and
they would get paid. -- A radical suggestion would be that the
people who approved the contract should share some of the
cost. The idea that a contractor was promised to be paid
more than was approved in a contract really disturbed him.
Council Member Levy said his comments were along the same
lines as Council Member Patitucci's. He assumed the thrust
of the amendment was not that the consultant did the work
and put in the hours but rather the other elements mentioned
by Council Member Patitucci,
Mr. Zaner suggested that he was the appropriate person to do
the report and not the City Auditor. He was responsible for
the administration of contracts. If, in fact, funds were
expended in the furtherance of a contract inappropriately,
he was responsible to the Council for that. Mr. Adams had
made some explanation of the issue, and he would be happy to
prepare a written report to the Council and lay out in
detail how the contract was administered and why the funds
were expended in excess of those authorized.
Council Member Renzel said staff explained the consultants
had incurred the costs, the documentation was there, and
there had been some reasonable explanation in terms of the
fact that the contractor was going to administer the con-
struction of a major project, in which case some of the
costs would have been absorbed. Nevertheless, the amendment
as intfrpreted, 4.e., to evaluate how the expenditure got
approved if it was not previously approved by the Council`
was different from whether to pay the consultant, which was
Recommendation *3 in the staff report. She believed they
probably should pay the consultant and also look into what
happened procedurally to ensure it did not reoccur
Vice Mayor Klein believed the City Auditor should look into
the matter. Council Members Patitucci and Levy correctly
read his mind in the amendment. .He was not sure they
received the value . for what was done, and he was not sure
the consultant really did his job; not in terms of hours but
whether he advised the City properly as a professional. fif
it could be explained that the City got value, not just
time, he would be willing to vote -for the $17,250. They
should never be in ;a position where the City merely paid
every time somebody submitted a slip for hours worked.
59-473
4/25/88
Mayor Sutorius clarified the amendment requested the City
Auditor to examine the scope, purpose, and appropriateness
of the work involved in the additional $17,000 payment. He
could understand an examination of the scope and purpose,
but he questioned whether the appropriateness waswithin the
evaluation area of the auditor from a professional stand-
point. They seemed to be getting into the question of
asking another consultant to make that kind of evaluation.
Council properly should examine costs, but they had to be
concerned about the costs of carrying out their directions.
How much time was going to .be expended and by what numbers
of personnel had a direct cost; moreover, there was an
indirect cost because other work was diverted.` As Council
proceeded further, he believed they would find a number of
situations where Council Members felt compelled to tackle
cost situations to look demanding. He was concerned the
Council did not add to the labors that could be unproductive
time and thereby miss the point of budget attention, and
cost control.
Council Member Patitucci respectfully disagreed with Mayor
Sutorius's last comments. It was not a light issue. The
whole basis of municipal finance was based on the concept
that the Council, as representatives of the public, estab-
lish limits on spending; staff operated within those limits;
and whenever there were changes, the issue returned to
Council. An appropriation was a legal, binding ordinance,
and he believed a contract was the same. When contracts
were exceeded by the authority of the staff who did not have
the authority to exceed them, that was not lust fooling
around with cost control.' It was a fairly serious matter,
and he wanted to know what the circumstances were. It was
important to get a report from the City Auditor and the City
Manager.
Council Member Levy believed the report should come from the
City Manager. If the Council questioned that report, it
would be: appropriate at that time to ask someone else to
audit the report.
ANENDNINT TO AMENDMENT: Council Meatier Levy moved,
ceded by Sutorius, to amend the amendment to change City
Auditor to Ci ty Manager,
iayor- Sutorius shared the point of view expressed by Council
Member Levy.. _. He felt a great deal of the City Manager's
focus was the material before Council, but he was sure the
City Manager would welcome the opportunity to provide a
response.
59-474
4/25/88
Council Member Fletcher asked Council Member Levy if he
would include payment for the consultant in the amendment to
the amendment.
Council Member. Levy understood the amendment was to hold off
payment until Council received the report.
AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT PASSED by a vote of 6-3, Klein,
,Renzel, Woolley voting 'no.-"
Council Member Renzel was sympathetic with the idea of
understanding how the process worked in arriving at the
point so they could have better control of the budget. On
the other hand, she was not comfortable with the amendment
as a substitute for the motion made by Council Member
Woolley. She would oppose the amendment in that vein.
Vice Mayor Klein clarified the amendment was not intended to
be a substitute but was in addition to the main motion.
Council Member Renzel clarified the main. motion was to
appropriate the money for the consultant, and Recommendation
*3 of the motion as amended by the amendment.
Vice Mayor Klein said that was correct; it would leave
$63,000 being paid to the consultant and only the $17,250
would remain at issue.
Council Member Renzel asked if that was staff's interpreta-
tion.
Mr. Zaner said yes.
AMENDMENT AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously.
Council Member Renzel complimented the UDC on their work and
echoed some of the concern raised by Council Member
Patitucci about the fountain area. One suggestion would be
to divide the area down the middle and make an interior -
facing planting area, semicircular out of it. People did
sit on the outer edge and aninner edge ,might focus people
toward the door as well as provide a comfortable, friendly
sitting area.
AJNBADRENTI Comma Member Levy moved, : seconded by
Fletcher, to instruct staff to make a proactive effort to
encourage food and other venders on site with adequate
seating and adequate trash receptacles.
Council Member Levy said the vagueness of the amendment was
specifically designed to give, staff the freedom and
flexibility to encourage as much food service and other
people -attracting activity as they felt was appropriate.
Council Member Woolley asked if the amendment meant staff
should go ahead and provide additional seating.
Council Member Levy said yes. If -staff felt it was appro-
priate to handle and encourage people --he had a luncheon
environment in mind --they should have the flexibility to do
so.
Council Member Woolley clarified there was no budget.
Council Member Levy was concerned if the Council moved at
its normal measured pace, it would be well beyond summer
before they were through, and that would be unfortunate.
Council Member Woolley did not want to, see the Council start
to do things one by one. She was afraid they would discover
other problems.
Vice Mayor Klein agreed with Council Member Woolley. He
could wait one more year and was concerned they do it right
and not have another failure on the plaza. Moreover, he did
not want to leave the issue to vague phrases such as "We'll
have a proactive policy," but wanted to know what the policy
would be. He regretted it might mean no program for 1988,
but hoped they would have a program for 1989 which made a
lot of sense.
Council Member Levy was concerned about the statement,
"Let's do it right." Obviously, they all wanted to do it
right, but he did not have the lack of humility to believe
he could design a plaza and do it right when a lot of people
throughout the world had designed plazas that did. not
achieve what they attempted. He was concerned about whether
they spent $20,000 or $50,000. The original plans to "do it
right" advocated. spending $500,000 and, frankly, he was not
completely satisfied that spending the $500,000 would do it
right and did not believe the UDC was either because of con-
struction constraints. There were a number of elements in
the $50,000 of expenditures that he was not sure would "do
it right." However, he was satisfied that the key to suc-
cess of anyplaza was having vendors there. He saw few
plazas anywhere in the world that were successful without
vendors, and it was critical to take .a proactive effort to
get vendors and have; places where people could sit down.
Council Member Fletcher had a . little concern that getting
vendors to the plaza in isolation would not do the trick
because there were not many passers-by who would know the
59-476
4/25/88
vendors were there. She believed it needed to involve more
planning,..\such as having a big kick-off event, a band, etc.
It might be premature to give direction to staff now.
AMENDMENT FAILED by a vote of 1-7 vote, Levy voting *aye,*
Patitucci absent.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED unanimously, Patitucci- absent.
COUNCIL RECESSED FROM 10:20
to 10:30 a.m.
13A. (OLD ITEM 5) _ FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDATION RE PR P D ,U i. Y R TE ADJUSTMENTS.
(701-04/1105/1102/1121-1111)
Director of Utilities Richard Young said San Francisco Water
Department staff would be recommending consumption reduc-
tions from the Retch Hetchy project of approximately 25 per-
cent and a rate increase in the wholesale sale of water
rangirig between 15 to 20 percent. The rate increase would
incorporate the 31 participants on the Peninsula. The pro-
posals were scheduled before the San Francisco Public
Utilities Commission (PUC) on April 28, 1988, after which
staff would know more about the City's position relative to
its economic survival in the Water Department. The impact
was considerable, especially in light of the recommendations
staff made to only deal with the internal problems of the
Water Department.
Mr. Zaner recommended the item be referred back to the F&PW
Committee. He saw no problem with regard to the staff
recommendation except present policy required the City
Manager to track PG&E rates in the Gas Fund. Staff believed
PG&E would be changing its gas rate in the wrong direction
within the next couple of days, and staff preferred to keep
the City's rate right where - it was until the matter could
again be referred by the F&PW Committee and the Council.
NOTION TO REM: Council Member Sechtel moved, eecond d
by le i n, to 1) refer the satire isebs back to the Teas*
And Public Works Committed; ,off 2) temporarily ouspend the
policy for the City Renee to track the PC&E gas rates.
Council Member Patitucci supported referring the water rate
increase back to F&PW o He asked for clarification about the
relationship between rates and the budget problems.
Mayor Sutorius said when the gas utility was not in position.
to fund itself, prior Councils made loans from the electric
utility to the gas utility in order to manage certain rate
levels without the rate shock that otherwise would have been
required, Those loans were repaid from one enterprise to
the other. Historically and beyond, the loans from one
enterprise to the other, there was a deficiency into the
General Fund from the gas utility and ultimately the. gas
utility picked it up. No one wanted to send the wrong
signals but they needed to recognize that as the rates went
up and as they endorsed the conservation effort, the City
would see a drop in sales. The nuances of the entire pack-
age needed to be understood in light of the further 15 to 20
percent increase contemplated for wholesale. rates.
\
Vice Mayor Klein was concerned about the information pro-
vided in the staff report (CMR:203:8). He asked for an
explanation of the City's rate base. He referred to page 2
of the report and "Adopted Budget/i2.43%." That number
multiplied by any of the revalued asset values did not equal
the numbers on the top line. He was advised it was because
other elements went into the "rate base." He was concerned
about the appropriate rate of return to the City's General
Fund from the new rate base. He believed it was appropriate
to revisit the issue and see whether the rate base and
reserves were appropriate. To the extent that a higher rate
of return was paid to the General Fund then there was less
in reserves and vice versa.
MOTION PASSED unanimously.
[fir. Zaner was launching a water conservation effort.
13B. OLD 10) FINANCE AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE RECOMNENDA-
TI N RE MUNICIPAL SERVICE CENTER - BUILDING C REMODEL,.
(CIP -06) CMR_:224 8 810-0
Mr. Zaner reviewed the minutes of the Finance and Public
Works (F&PW) Committee and no action was taken. The agenda
was improperly noticed and he requested that Couneit defer
the item until May 2, 1988, when the item could be properly
worded on the agenda.
Council Member Patitucci said the F&PW Committee continued
the item to a meeting where the Committee could have the
bids. He believed the item was supposed to return to the
Committee before it went to the Council.
LION TO CONTINUE& Vita Mayor Klein moved, seconded by
D.cbtel, to continue the Item to the May 2, 11$8, City
Council meeting.
NOTION PASSED by a : vote of 8-1, Patitucci voting "no.
59_478
4/25/88
ADJOURNMENT
Council adjourned to a Closed Session re litigation at
10:40 p.m.
Final adjournment at 10:57 p.m.
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICITYY
This is to certify that the microphotographs appearing on this
microform, starting with VOL. 4 53
and ending with _ _ 04, 5 /
are accurate and complete reproductions of
as delivered to the undersigned
in the regular course of business, for microfilming.
It is further certified that the micrographic processes .used
were accomplished in a manner, and on =microfilm. which meets
the requirements of the American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) and the Association for Xnformation and Image Management
(AIM).
Date produced:
Place:
aUAK 19 9/ By:
Sunnyvale, Calif. 94086
City State zip